Judgment :- Heard Mr.K.N.Thampi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.V.Manoharan, the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1, 3 and 4 and Ms.A.L.Ganthimathi, the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. 2. It is seen from the prayer in the writ petition that the petitioner has sought for a writ of mandamus from this Court, to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner for selection of candidates for admission to the Post Graduate Course in the 2nd respondent University for the academic year 1999-2000. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that in spite of the fact that he had written a letter to the petitioner to know the latest position in the matter, he has not got a reply from the petitioner. 4. Mr.V.Manoharan, the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1, 3 and 4 had submitted that the writ petition has become infructuous, in view of the fact that the petitioner has sought for a direction from this Court only with regard to her admission for the Post Graduate Course in the second respondent University for the academic year 1999-2000. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has not controverted the submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. 6. In such circumstances, the writ petition is closed as infructuous. No costs.